Lacosamide in pediatric and adult patients: comparison of efficacy and safety

Long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability, including behavior and executive functioning, during adjunctive lacosamide treatment in pediatric patients with uncontrolled epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability, including behavior and executive functioning, during adjunctive lacosamide (LCM) treatment in pediatric patients (≥1 month to <18 years of age) with focal-onset or generalized seizures enrolled in 2 open-label, long-term follow-up trials.

METHODS

Two open-label extension trials (SP848: NCT00938912; EP0034: NCT01964560) were conducted in pediatric patients who had participated in previous trials of adjunctive LCM (SP0847/NCT00938431; SP0966/NCT01969851; EP0060/NCT02710890; SP0967/NCT02477839; SP0969/NCT01921205); SP848 also directly enrolled eligible pediatric patients who had not previously participated in a clinical trial of LCM. Outcomes included retention, efficacy, and safety/tolerability. Patient improvement was assessed with Clinician's and Caregiver's Global Impression of Change scale. Behavior and emotional function was assessed with Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and executive functioning was assessed with Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function® (BRIEF).

RESULTS

The pooled dataset from both trials included 905 patients (851 in the focal-onset seizure population and 47 in the generalized seizure population). In the overall population, Kaplan-Meier-estimated 1-year retention was 80 %. From baseline to the end of the treatment period, patients in the focal-onset seizure population had a median percent reduction in focal-onset seizure frequency per 28 days of 60.4 %, 55.4 % of patients were 50 % responders, and 40.8 % of patients were 75 % responders. In patients with ≥12 months of LCM treatment, ≥12 month seizure freedom during the LCM treatment period was achieved by 29.9 % of patients in the focal-onset seizure population (median duration of first ≥12-month seizure-free interval: 641 days) and 24.4 % of patients in the generalized seizure population (median duration of first ≥12-month seizure-free interval: 665 days). Improvement during LCM treatment was reported in >75 % of patients by both physicians and caregivers. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 749 (82.8 %) patients, most commonly pyrexia (18.9 %), upper respiratory tract infection (18.6 %), nasopharyngitis (16.2 %), vomiting (15.7 %), and somnolence (11.8 %). The most common drug-related TEAEs were somnolence (8.5 %), dizziness (7.6 %), and vomiting (5.4 %). Behavioral and emotional function was generally stable in patients 1.5-5 years of age and slightly improved in patients ≥6 years of age, and executive functioning was stable in patients <5 years of age and generally slightly improved in patients 5-18 years of age.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of a large patient pool from 2 open-label trials, long-term adjunctive LCM was efficacious and generally well tolerated in children with epilepsy and focal-onset or generalized seizures. Behavior and executive functioning were generally stable without observable worsening during long-term adjunctive LCM treatment.

Effectiveness and safety of Lacosamide in pediatric patients with epilepsy under four years: Results from a prospective cohort study in China

BACKGROUND

Lacosamide (LCM) has shown promising efficacy and safety outcomes in clinical trials. However, the evidence is limited among pediatric patients especially under four years in real-world. The study investigated the treatment outcomes and safety of LCM in patients under four years based on the data of the epilepsy registry of Children in China.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted among patients under 4 years who newly received LCM as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy. The treatment outcomes were measured by retention rate of LCM, 50 % response rates and seizure-free rates during follow-up. The retention rate of LCM was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier survival model. Adverse events were reported as a percentage of all participants.

RESULTS

Of 109 participants (mean follow-up: 18.6 months), 59 received LCM as monotherapy and 50 as adjunctive therapy. Sixty patients had focal epilepsy, 44 had generalized epilepsy and 5 had combined generalized and focal epilepsy. 70 % of patients in the monotherapy group and 41 % in the adjunctive therapy group remained on LCM treatment without additional treatments for at least one year. In patients with monotherapy, 50 % response rate and seizure-free rate were 75 % and 56 % at 12 months, respectively. In adjunctive therapy group, these rates were 51 % and 36 %, respectively. Lower baseline seizure frequency in both treatment groups (monotherapy: p < 0.001; adjunctive therapy: p = 0.02) and younger age groups within the monotherapy group (P = 0.04) correlated with a higher LCM retention rate. Adverse events were reported by 15 patients (13.8 %), with somnolence being the most common (7 of 15 patients).

CONCLUSION

With a comprehensive information and high-quality of data, the study demonstrates the effective treatment outcome and safety of LCM. The study adds reliable evidence to exiting real-word evidence of LCM in the specific age group of patients with epilepsy to fill the evidence gap.

Equipotency of lacosamide to levetiracetam in new onset focal epilepsy: A randomized controlled trial

Objectives

Levetiracetam (LEV) is a well-established broad spectrum antiseizure medication (ASM) effective in focal, generalized, and myoclonic seizures whereas lacosamide (LCM) is a comparatively newer ASM currently approved only as an add-on agent in focal seizures. The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and the tolerability of oral LCM as monotherapy in adult people with epilepsy (PWE) with new onset focal onset epilepsy compared with those receiving LEV.

Materials and Methods

In this open-label single-center non-inferiority trial, PWE aged between 16 and 65 years suffering from new onset focal seizures, with or without secondary generalization were put on LCM monotherapy or LEV monotherapy. Data regarding demographic characteristics, seizure type and etiology, LCM and LEV daily dose, seizure frequency at baseline and at 6 months of follow-up, and seizure freedom rates were recorded.

Results

Thirty-five PWE on LCM (24 males), their mean age: 38.20 ± 16.62 years and 35 PWE on LEV (25 males, mean age: 38.91 ± 17.13 years) were enrolled. The most common type of seizure observed was focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizure >70% followed by focal impaired awareness seizure and focal awareness seizure. Structural epilepsy was found in 21 among LCM group and 22 of LEV group. In the LCM group, the seizure frequency decreased from 3.33 ± 1.88 to 0.85 ± 1.09 (P = 0.001) at 6 months and from 3.61 ± 3.12 to 0.94 ± 1.24 (P = 0.001) in LEV group, intergroup difference (P = 0.74). At 6-month follow-up period, 78.9% in LCM arm and 87.9% in the LEV arm had experienced a 50% of reduction in seizure frequency while seizure freedom was attained in 43.3% of PWE in both the arms (P = 1). The most common treatment emergent adverse effects in the LCM group were fatiguability, dyspepsia, headache, and dizziness, while in the LEV group; somnolence and behavioral abnormality.

Conclusion

Treatment with LCM met the non-inferiority criteria when compared with LEV. Therefore, it might be useful as first-line monotherapy for adults with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of lacosamide among children: is it helpful?

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of Lacosamide (LCM) in a pediatric population with epilepsy using LCM serum concentration and its correlation to the age of the participants and the dosage of the drug. Methods: Demographic and clinical data were collected from the medical records of children with epilepsy treated with LCM at Shamir Medical Center between February 2019 to September 2021, in whom medication blood levels were measured. Trough serum LCM concentration was measured in the biochemical laboratory using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) and correlated with the administered weight-based medication dosing and clinical report. Results: Forty-two children aged 10.43 ± 5.13 years (range: 1-18) were included in the study. The average daily dose of LCM was 306.62 ± 133.20 mg (range: 100-600). The average number of seizures per day was 3.53 ± 7.25 compared to 0.87 ± 1.40 before and after LCM treatment, respectively. The mean LCM serum concentration was 6.74 ± 3.27 mg/L. No statistically significant association was found between LCM serum levels and the clinical response (p = 0.58), as well as the correlation between LCM dosage and the change in seizure rate (p = 0.30). Our study did not find a correlation between LCM serum concentration and LCM dosage and the gender of the participants: males (n = 17) females (n = 23) (p = 0.31 and p = 0.94, respectively). A positive trend was found between age and LCM serum concentrations (r = 0.26, p = 0.09). Conclusion: Based on the data that has been obtained from our study, it appears that therapeutic drug monitoring for LCM may not be necessary. Nonetheless, further research in this area is needed in the light of the relatively small sample size of the study.

Investigation of the efficacy and adverse effects of lacosamide over 36 months

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and retention rate of lacosamide (LCM) over 36 months as a treatment for children and adolescents with focal and generalized epilepsy based on a retrospective study.

METHODS

All patients prescribed LCM as monotherapy and add-on therapy between October 2016 and September 2019 at Jichi Children's Medical Center Tochigi were included in the study. The response rate, retention rate, and adverse effects were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 126 (female, n = 73) patients of 1.3 to 34.9 years old (median age: 12.8 years; mean ± SD 13.2 ± 6.6 years) received LCM as monotherapy or add-on treatment for focal, generalized, and combined focal and generalized epilepsy. The response rate was 40.5% at 3 months, 40.5% at 6 months, 38.1% at 9 months, 35.7% at 12 months, 25.9% at 24 months, and 29.4% at 36 months. For 34 patients who were observable for 36 months, the retention rate was 70.6% at 3 months, but then gradually declined to 34.8% at 36 months. According to the number of concomitant anti-seizure medications (ASMs), the retention rate was higher in patients receiving <3 ASMs than in those receiving ≥3 ASMs at all observation points. The most common adverse effects were somnolence in 21 patients (16.7%) and dizziness in 5 patients (39.7%).

CONCLUSION

Our response rate was lower and our retention rate was higher in comparison to a previous study that observed patients over 36 months. Further prospective studies in children are required to confirm the response rate and retention rate in patients treated with LCM over 36 months.

Use of lacosamide in children: experience of a tertiary medical care center in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Lacosamide (LCM) is a third-generation anti-seizure drug approved in Europe and the United States, either as a monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, to treat partial-onset seizures in adults, adolescents, and children. In Brazil, LCM is licensed for treatment only in patients older than 16 years of age.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a cohort of children presenting with refractory epilepsy who received LCM as an add-on therapy and observe the response and tolerability to the LCM treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study conducted in a tertiary health care facility, which included 26 children, aged up to 16 years, who presented with refractory epilepsy and received LCM as an add-on treatment. The follow-up visits were scheduled every 3 months until 9 months of treatment with LCM.

RESULTS

After 3 months of LCM administration, in 73.1% of the children, there was a reduction of > 50% in the frequency of seizures, and this clinical improvement was maintained in most patients (73.9%) for the following 9 months. Mild (such as, somnolence and behavioral changes) or severe (seizure worsening) adverse effects were observed in two and three children respectively. Among responders to LCM, there was a higher prevalence of males, fewer concomitant anti-seizure drugs, and lower percentage of patients using sodium channel blockers.

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide should be considered as an early treatment option in pediatric patients with refractory epilepsy, mainly focal seizures.

Efficacy and safety of lacosamide in pediatric patients with epilepsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Lacosamide (LCM), is a third-generation antiseizure medicine, with limited clinical evidence for use in pediatric populations. We aimed to evaluate evidence for the efficacy and safety of LCM in pediatric patients with epilepsy.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using literature published from inception to February 2022 identified in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases. Efficacy and safety outcome data were collected, and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULT

Twenty-one studies involving 1230 pediatric patients were included. The median percent reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline to maintenance was 33.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.7%, 43.5%). After 6 months of treatment, the 50%, 75%, and 100% responder rates were 53.3% (95% CI 40.7%, 65.9%), 28.3% (95% CI 20.8%, 35.8%), and 20.4% (95% CI 12.6%, 28.2%), respectively. After 12 months of treatment, the 50%, 75%, and 100% responder rates were 42.0% (95% CI 29.5%, 54.5%), 19.5% (95% CI 11.1%, 27.8%), and 15.2% (95% CI 6.6%, 23.8%), respectively. The most common adverse events (AEs) were drowsiness (15.0%), dizziness (9.9%), and somnolence (8.3%).

CONCLUSION

Lacosamide is generally effective and well tolerated to use in children with epilepsy. However, further research with high-quality data and long-term follow-up of LCM use in pediatric populations is needed.

Individualizing doses of antiepileptic drugs

INTRODUCTION

This review aims to identify the optimal therapeutic dosage of anti-epileptic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with multiple comorbidities.

AREAS COVERED

We have analyzed changes in terms of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of Brivaracetam, Carbamazepine, Lacosamide, Lamotrigine, Levetiracetam, Topiramate, Valproate, and Zonisamide in liver disease, chronic kidney disease, and in patients admitted to intensive care unit. Our literature search covers the past 5 years. We used PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE database's to support our article.

EXPERT OPINION

To ensure that the patient with seizure receives the best treatment in relation to their comorbidities, careful clinical-laboratory monitoring is necessary to maximize effectiveness while maintaining safety, especially in the case of polytherapy.

Safety and Tolerability of Lacosamide in Patients With Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: As a third-generation antiseizure medication (ASM), lacosamide (LCM) is recommended worldwide for patients with epilepsy. We aimed to provide more conclusive evidence for the safety and tolerability of LCM in patients with epilepsy. Methods: A systematic search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, IDB, VIP Database, and Wanfang Database from inception to 2021 March, and all studies assessing the safety of LCM were included. A meta-analysis was performed for safety data of LCM. Results: Eighty-three studies involving 12268 populations (11 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 16 cohort studies, 53 case series, and 3 case reports) were included in our study. Meta-analysis of the total incidence of adverse events (AEs) of LCM was 38.7% [95% CI (35.1%, 45.8%); n=75 studies]. Incidence of withdrawal due to AEs was 10.8% [95% CI (9.1%, 12.6%); n=56 studies], and incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) was 6.5% [95% CI (4.0%, 8.9%); n=13 studies]. Most AEs were in the nervous system and digestive system. The most common AEs were sedation (15.8%), dizziness (15.7%), fatigue (9.4%), and nausea/vomiting (9.3%). For children, the total incidence of AEs of LCM was 32.8% [95% CI (21.6%, 44.0%); n=16 studies], and the most common AEs were dizziness (8.6%), nausea/vomiting (8.6%), and somnolence (6.8%). Conclusion: Lacosamide is generally safe and well tolerated in patients with epilepsy. Common AEs were sedation, dizziness, and fatigue. It is necessary to pay more attention to the prevention and management of these AEs and conduct more large-scale and high-quality studies to update safety data.

Safety, efficacy, and tolerability of lacosamide for the treatment of epilepsy in pediatric patients in Uygur, China

PURPOSE

Lacosamide (LCM) was approved in China in 2018. However, the safety of LCM has not been established in pediatric patients. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate its safety, efficacy, and tolerability in pediatric patients living in Uygur, Northwest China.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of pediatric patients diagnosed with epilepsy and on LCM therapy at a medical center. The seizure frequencies at 3, 6, and 12 months after starting LCM therapy were recorded and compared with the baseline monthly frequency. The primary outcome variables were the 50% responder and seizure-free rates. The secondary outcome variables included the terminal 6-month seizure remission and percentages of discontinuation due to a lack of efficacy and tolerability. Safety variables included the incidence and type of adverse reactions.

RESULTS

Seventy-two pediatric patients with epilepsy living in Uygur, China and receiving LCM treatment were included in the present study. Fifty (69%) children responded to LCM therapy with a more than 50% reduction in the frequency of seizures. Seizure-free rates increased over time, at 14%, 19%, and 20% at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. The number of baseline anti-seizure medications (ASMs) and order of LCM introduction significantly impacted the likelihood of seizure remission during the 12-month follow-up period (p < 0.05). During the entire period of LCM treatment, twenty-two children (30.5%) experienced at least one adverse reaction.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study of 72 pediatric patients with epilepsy in Uygur, China, showed that LCM therapy is safe and effective for epilepsy in children, resulting in a reduction in the seizure rate.

Efficacy and tolerability of treatment with lacosamide in children: Postmarketing experience from the Middle East

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of lacosamide (LCM) in Lebanese children with focal-onset seizures and to determine if specific variables are predictive of better effectiveness.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis from three medical centers on consecutive children diagnosed with focal onset seizures and initiated on LCM. The seizure frequencies following the introduction of LCM were recorded and compared to the baseline monthly frequency at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The primary efficacy variables were the 50% responder and seizure-free rates. The secondary outcome variables included the terminal 6-month seizure remission and percentages of discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or tolerability.

RESULTS

58 patients with a mean age of 10 years experiencing a mean of 36.2 seizures per month during baseline were included. The seizure-free rates were 32.8%, 29.7%, and 12.5% at 6, 12 and 24 months follow up, respectively. Patients concomitantly treated with a sodium channel blocker were less likely to achieve a terminal 6-month seizure remission while the early introduction of LCM resulted in a significantly higher likelihood of attaining such a remission. 74.1% of patients were still maintained on LCM at the last follow-up. The most common adverse events consisted of dizziness, somnolence, nausea, vomiting, and rarely double vision.

CONCLUSIONS

LCM is efficacious and overall well tolerated in children with focal-onset seizures and exhibits higher efficacy with early introduction and when added to a non-sodium channel blocker.

The adverse-effect profile of lacosamide

Introduction: Lacosamide has been used in epilepsy patients in the United States, Europe and Asia since it was approved by the FDA in 2008. Many patients have benefited from this drug as a new generation of sodium channel blocker. With the worldwide use of this drug, its adverse effects have gradually emerged, especially some rare adverse events.Areas covered: The present review aims to summarize the adverse effects of lacosamide reported in the literature in recent years to promote the safe clinical application of the drug.Expert opinion: In more than 10 years of experience in drug usage, adverse reactions of lacosamide have also been gradually discovered. The review showed that lacosamide is safe and effective in antiepileptic treatment, and its common side effects are dizziness, headache, drowsiness, diplopia, and cardiovascular abnormalities. Skin rashes, hematotoxicity and heart damage, psychological symptoms and suicide risk have also been reported and emphasized.

Genomic and clinical predictors of lacosamide response in refractory epilepsies

OBJECTIVE

Clinical and genetic predictors of response to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are largely unknown. We examined predictors of lacosamide response in a real-world clinical setting.

METHODS

We tested the association of clinical predictors with treatment response using regression modeling in a cohort of people with refractory epilepsy. Genetic assessment for lacosamide response was conducted via genome-wide association studies and exome studies, comprising 281 candidate genes.

RESULTS

Most patients (479/483) were treated with LCM in addition to other AEDs. Our results corroborate previous findings that patients with refractory genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE) may respond to treatment with LCM. No clear clinical predictors were identified. We then compared 73 lacosamide responders, defined as those experiencing greater than 75% seizure reduction or seizure freedom, to 495 nonresponders (<25% seizure reduction). No variants reached the genome-wide significance threshold in our case-control analysis.

SIGNIFICANCE

No genetic predictor of lacosamide response was identified. Patients with refractory GGE might benefit from treatment with lacosamide.

Efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide in pediatric patients with focal seizures

Objective

To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide in children and adolescents with uncontrolled focal (partial-onset) seizures.

Methods

In this double-blind trial (SP0969; NCT01921205), patients (age ≥4–<17 years) with uncontrolled focal seizures were randomized (1:1) to adjunctive lacosamide/placebo. After a 6-week titration, patients who reached the target dose range for their weight (<30 kg: 8–12 mg/kg/d oral solution; ≥30–<50 kg: 6–8 mg/kg/d oral solution; ≥50 kg: 300–400 mg/d tablets) entered a 10-week maintenance period. The primary outcome was change in focal seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline to maintenance.

Results

Three hundred forty-three patients were randomized; 306 (lacosamide 152 of 171 [88.9%]; placebo 154 of 172 [89.5%]) completed treatment (titration and maintenance). Adverse events (AEs) were the most common reasons for discontinuation during treatment (lacosamide 4.1%; placebo 5.8%). From baseline to maintenance, percent reduction in focal seizure frequency per 28 days for lacosamide (n = 170) vs placebo (n = 168) was 31.7% (p = 0.0003). During maintenance, median percent reduction in focal seizure frequency per 28 days was 51.7% for lacosamide and 21.7% for placebo. Fifty percent responder rates (≥50% reduction) were 52.9% and 33.3% (odds ratio 2.17, p = 0.0006). During treatment, treatment-emergent AEs were reported by 67.8% lacosamide-treated patients (placebo 58.1%), most commonly (≥10%) somnolence (14.0%, placebo 5.2%) and dizziness (10.5%, placebo 3.5%).

Conclusions

Adjunctive lacosamide was efficacious in reducing seizure frequency and generally well tolerated in patients (age ≥4–<17 years) with focal seizures.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:

NCT01921205.

Classification of evidence

This trial provides Class I evidence that for children and adolescents with uncontrolled focal seizures, adjunctive lacosamide reduces seizure frequency.

Role of observational studies in supporting extrapolation of efficacy data from adults to children with epilepsy - A systematic review of the literature using lacosamide as an example

Extrapolation of efficacy data from adults to children is accepted for focal epilepsy - the antiepileptic drug, lacosamide, has been approved for the treatment of children ≥4 years of age on this basis. Since many small-scale, open-label studies are reported in the literature before approval, a systematic review was conducted to ascertain whether results of these could be used to support extrapolation in epilepsy in the future. In the absence of randomised trials, a second analysis was conducted for reports on lacosamide use in adults with generalized epilepsies. Twenty-seven articles were included in the paediatric qualitative synthesis, and 14 in the adult. Paediatric studies were analysed separately based on seizure type: focal, generalised and mixed. In focal epilepsy, safety and seizure-related findings mirrored those observed in the adult Phase II/III trials, supporting the feasibility of data extrapolation. Few studies reported outcomes in children with epilepsies associated with generalised seizures, and those that included children with different seizure types, mostly did not provide results separately. Lacosamide treatment appeared beneficial for children and adults experiencing tonic-clonic and myoclonic seizures. Reports of seizure aggravation were inconsistent and, in many cases, could not be clearly attributed to lacosamide. Given the absence of sufficient data, evidence for the feasibility of extrapolation was not as clear-cut as it was in focal epilepsy. These results highlight the complexities of conducting trials in the generalised epilepsy setting, and the importance of studies in the real-life setting and of analysing efficacy data per generalized seizure type and syndrome.

Safety and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide in a pediatric population with focal seizures - An open-label trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate safety and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide in children with focal seizures.

METHODS

Patients were eligible for this open-label, fixed-titration trial (SP0847; NCT00938431) if aged 1 month-17 years with focal seizures taking 1-3 antiepileptic drugs. Findings from Cohort 1, aged 5-11 years, who received lacosamide ≤8 mg/kg/day, informed dosing for age-based cohorts 2-5, who then received ≤12 mg/kg/day (≤600 mg/day). Oral lacosamide was initiated at 2 mg/kg/day (1 mg/kg bid) and uptitrated by 2 mg/kg/day/week to the maximum cohort-defined dose (maximum trial duration: 13 weeks). Patients who did not achieve the maximum cohort-defined dose were discontinued.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients (aged 6 months-≤17 years) enrolled (≥1 month-<4 years: n = 15; ≥4-<12 years: n = 23; ≥12-≤17 years: n = 9). 24/47 (51.1%) patients completed the trial at the maximum cohort-defined dose and 40/47 (85.1%) continued lacosamide in the extension trial. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 42/47 (89.4%) patients. The most common TEAEs (≥10% of patients) were vomiting (21.3%), diarrhea (14.9%), somnolence (12.8%), irritability, dizziness, and pyrexia (10.6% each). Twenty (42.6%) patients discontinued due to TEAEs, most commonly vomiting (8.5%), gait disturbance, dizziness, and somnolence (6.4% each). Six (12.8%) patients reported serious TEAEs, most commonly status epilepticus (3/47; 6.4%).

CONCLUSION

This fixed-titration trial supports the safety of adjunctive lacosamide in children (aged 6 months-≤17 years) with focal seizures. The TEAE profile was generally consistent with that observed in trials in adults, and no new safety concerns were identified.

Pharmacokinetic considerations for anti-epileptic drugs in children

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy is a chronic and debilitating neurological disease, with a peak of incidence in the first years of life. Today, the vast armamentarium of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) available make even more challenging to select the most appropriate AED and establish the most effective dosing regimen. In fact, AEDs pharmacokinetics is under the influence of important age-related factors which cannot be ignored. Areas covered: Physiological changes occurring during development age (different body composition, immature metabolic patterns, reduced renal activity) can significantly modify the pharmacokinetic profile of AEDs (adsorption, volume of distribution, half-life, clearance), leading to an altered treatment response. We reviewed the main pharmacokinetic characteristics of AEDs used in children, focusing on age-related factors which are of relevance when treating this patient population. Expert opinion: To deal with this pharmacokinetic variability, physicians have at their disposal two tools: 1) therapeutic drug concentration monitoring, which may help to set the optimal therapeutic regimen for each patient and to monitor eventual fluctuation, and 2) the use of extended-release drug formulations, when available. In the next future, the development of 'ad-hoc' electronic dashboard systems will represent relevant decision-support tools making the AED therapy even more individualized and precise, especially in children.

Lacosamide in children with drug-resistant epilepsy

AIM

To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of lacosamide in paediatric clinical practice.

METHODS

A search of our hospital's pharmacy database yielded all children <16 years old dispensed lacosamide for drug-resistant epilepsy between January 2011 and June 2016. Medical records were reviewed for clinical and drug details. Continued treatment for ≥12 months was considered an indicator of effectiveness and tolerability.

RESULTS

A total of 107 children (61 boys) satisfied inclusion criteria. Median age at lacosamide commencement was 9.9 years (interquartile range 6.7-13.7). Of those children, 57 (53%) children had focal epilepsy, with focal motor or impaired awareness seizures most commonly reported; 50 (47%) children had generalised epilepsy, most with tonic-clonic seizures, tonic seizures or epileptic spasms; 83 (78%) children had an intellectual disability, 24 (22%) had a physical disability and 22 (21%) had an autism spectrum disorder; 69 (65%) children continued lacosamide for ≥12 months. Reasons for discontinuation before 12 months in 38 (35%) children included ineffectiveness in 25 (66%), adverse events in 7 (18%) and worsening of seizures in 2 (5%). The most common adverse events were drowsiness, behavioural changes, unsteadiness, nausea and vomiting. Epilepsy type and comorbidities were not associated with continuation or reasons for discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Most children continued treatment with lacosamide, suggesting effectiveness and tolerability. Lacosamide may prove to be a useful, 'broad-spectrum' antiepileptic medication in children for focal and generalised epilepsies and in association with comorbidities.

Safety and tolerability profile of new antiepileptic drug treatment in children with epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of pediatric epilepsy requires a careful evaluation of the safety and tolerability profile of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) to avoid or minimize as much as possible adverse events (AEs) on various organs, hematological parameters, and growth, pubertal, motor, cognitive and behavioral development.

AREAS COVERED

Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) reported in the literature 2000-2018 regarding second- and third-generation AEDs used in the pediatric age, with exclusion of the neonatal period that exhibits specific peculiarities, have been described on the basis of their frequency, severity/tolerability, and particular association with a given AED.

EXPERT OPINION

Somnolence/sedation and behavioral changes, like irritability and nervousness, are among the most commonly observed TEAEs associated with almost all AEDs. Lamotrigine, Gabapentin, Oxcarbazepine, and Levetiracetam appear to be the best-tolerated AEDs with a ≤2% withdrawal rate, while Tiagabine and Everolimus are discontinued in up to >20% of the patients because of intolerable TEAEs. For some AEDs, literature data are scanty to draw a high-level evidence on their safety and tolerability profile. The reasons are: insufficient population size, short duration of treatments, or lack of controlled trials. A future goal is that of identifying clearer, easier, and more homogeneous methodological strategies to facilitate AED testing in pediatric populations.

Intravenous lacosamide for treatment of absence status epilepticus in genetic generalized epilepsy: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Nearly 10 years after its introduction into the market, the significance of lacosamide in genetic generalized epilepsies is still unclear. Its new mode of action may qualify lacosamide as a therapeutic agent in this entity, but only a limited number of cases have been published so far.

AIM

To describe the efficacy of lacosamide as treatment in a patient with the absence status epilepticus.

METHOD

We report on a 28-year-old woman with genetic generalized epilepsy who suffered recurrent absence status epilepticus during video-EEG-monitoring. After treatment failure of first- and second-line medication, lacosamide was administered. The outcome in this patient was evaluated, and a systematic literature review was performed for the use of lacosamide in the absence status epilepticus.

RESULTS

After application of 400 mg lacosamide intravenously, the absence status epilepticus terminated within 30 minutes. No further seizures or epileptiform discharges reoccurred until the end of video-EEG-Monitoring 3 days later.

CONCLUSIONS

The role of lacosamide as a therapeutic option in patients with the absence status epilepticus is unclear. Only two cases have been reported so far with conflicting results. Further randomized controlled studies are required to validate the relevance of lacosamide as treatment for status epilepticus in genetic generalized and the absence epilepsy.

Lacosamide monotherapy in clinical practice: A retrospective chart review

OBJECTIVE

To assess effectiveness and tolerability of first-line and conversion to lacosamide monotherapy for focal seizures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective, non-interventional chart review of lacosamide monotherapy patients aged ≥16 years in Europe. Outcomes included retention rate at observational point (OP) 3 (12 ± 3 months), seizure freedom rates at OP2 (6 ± 3 months) and OP3 and adverse drug reactions (ADRs).

RESULTS

A total of 439 patients were included (98 first-line and 341 conversion to monotherapy; 128 aged ≥65 years [25 first-line and 103 conversion to monotherapy]). First-line and conversion to monotherapy retention rates were 60.2% (59/98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 49.8%-70.0%) and 62.5% (213/341; 57.1%-67.6%), respectively. Kaplan-Meier estimates of 12-month retention rates were 81.2% and 91.4% for first-line and conversion to monotherapy, respectively. First-line and conversion to monotherapy retention rates in patients aged ≥65 years were 60.0% (38.7%-78.9%) and 68.9% (59.1%-77.7%), respectively. At OP2, 66.3% of first-line and 63.0% of conversion to monotherapy patients were seizure free. At OP3, 60.2% of first-line and 52.5% of conversion to monotherapy patients were seizure free. In the ≥65 years subgroup, seizure freedom rates at OP2 were 72.0% and 68.0% for first-line and converted to monotherapy, respectively, and at OP3, 68.0% and 56.3%, respectively. Overall, 52 of 439 (11.8%) patients reported ADRs (16.4% in ≥65 years subgroup), most commonly dizziness (5.0%), headache (2.1%) and somnolence (1.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide was effective and well tolerated as first-line or conversion to monotherapy in a clinical setting in adult and elderly patients with focal seizures.

A Review of the New Antiepileptic Drugs for Focal-Onset Seizures in Pediatrics: Role of Extrapolation

Most antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) receive regulatory approval for children years after the drug is available in adults, encouraging off-label use of the drug in children and hindering attempts to obtain quality pediatric data in controlled trials. Extrapolating adult efficacy data to pediatrics can reduce the time between approval in adults and that in children. To extrapolate efficacy from adults to children, several assumptions must be supported, such as (1) a similar disease progression and response to interventions in adults and children, and (2) similar exposure response in adults and children. The Pediatric Epilepsy Academic Consortium for Extrapolation (PEACE) addressed these assumptions in focal-onset seizures (FOS), the most common seizure type in both adults and children. PEACE reviewed the biological and clinical evidence that supported the assumptions that children with FOS have a similar disease progression and response to intervention as adults with FOS. After age 2 years, the pathophysiological underpinnings of FOS and the biological milieu in which seizures are initiated and propagated in children, seizure semiology, electroencephalographic features, etiology and AED response to FOS in children are similar to those in adults with FOS. PEACE concluded that extrapolation of efficacy data in adults to pediatrics in FOS is supported by strong scientific and clinical evidence. However, safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) data cannot be extrapolated from adults to children. Based on extrapolation, eslicarbazepine is now approved for children with FOS, down to age 4 years. Perampanel, lacosamide and brivaracetam are now undergoing PK and safety studies for the purposes of extrapolation down to age 2 or 4 years. When done in conjunction with PK and safety investigations in children, extrapolation of adult data from adults to children can reduce the time delay between approval of effective and safe AEDs in adults and approval in children.

The effectiveness and safety of lacosamide in children with epilepsy in a clinical practice setting

BACKGROUND

Seizures in up to 30% of children with epilepsy become refractory to treatment, decreasing their quality of life. Studies suggest that lacosamide may be effective in pediatric patients with refractory epilepsy.

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness and safety of lacosamide in a population of children with mostly focal refractory epilepsy.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of children aged <18years presenting to a single hospital in Spain. Data from baseline, and 3, 6, and 12months after lacosamide initiation were collected and analyzed. Response to lacosamide was categorized by seizure frequency (seizure freedom or ≥75%, ≥50%, and <50% reduction in seizures).

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-one pediatric patients (~55% male) with focal epilepsy treated with lacosamide were included. The mean age at lacosamide initiation was 9.4years, and the mean duration of epilepsy was 5.4years. Seizure-free rates at 3, 6, and 12months were 9.7%, 11.8%, and 16.0%. At 12months, 44.4% of the population had a ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency. When analyzing response according to the number of previous/concomitant AEDs, those patients who received ≤2 previous AEDs/fewer concomitant AEDs had significantly greater response rates than those who received greater numbers of previous/concomitant AEDs; however, no predictive factors for response were identified. The most common adverse events were seizure number increased (14.7%), diplopia (5.2%), dizziness (3.7%), ataxia (2.1%), and drowsiness (2.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide use in children with refractory focal epilepsy can result in a reduction in seizure rate that improves progressively over time with few adverse effects, making lacosamide a promising option in these patients.

Lacosamide treatment of childhood refractory focal epilepsy: the first reported side effect in paediatric patients

PURPOSE

Lacosamide (LCM) is an effective antiepileptic drug (AED) approved for the treatment of focal epilepsy in both children and adults. The aim of this observational study was to review our centre's experience with LCM and to characterise its efficacy and tolerability as an adjunct therapy in children with refractory focal epilepsy.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 12 paediatric patients who underwent treatment with LCM from January 2014 to December 2015. We recorded the treatment response at three time points: at 3 and 6 months after LCM therapy and at the final follow-up visit. Children showing seizure reduction ≥ 50% were considered responders.

RESULTS

We included 12 patients (five boys), and their mean age was 13.8 years (range: 6.2-17.6 years) at the end of LCM treatment. The average length of follow-up after starting LCM was 23 months (11-37 months). Eight patients (66%) had > 50% reduction in seizures at the 3-month follow-up visit, and seven (58%) had > 50% reduction at the 6-month follow-up visit. Six patients (50%) maintained ≥ 50% reduction in seizures at the final follow-up visit. Two patients (16.6%) were seizure free at the 6-month and final follow-up visits. Common adverse side effects included dizziness, ataxia, nausea, and vomiting. Two patients developed status epilepticus (SE), one each at 3 and 11 days after the first LCM dose; they both discontinued treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study points to the efficacy of LCM in a small paediatric group. Furthermore, it was important to report status epilepticus after LCM administration in the paediatric population for the first time.

Comparing Safety and Efficacy of "Third-Generation" Antiepileptic Drugs: Long-Term Extension and Post-marketing Treatment

Four "third-generation" antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were approved for adjunctive treatment of refractory focal onset seizures during the past 10 years. Long-term efficacy and safety of the drugs were demonstrated in large extension studies and in reports of subgroups of patients not studied in pivotal trials. Reviewing extension study and post-marketing outcome series for the four newer AEDs-lacosamide, perampanel, eslicarbazepine acetate and brivaracetam-can guide clinicians in treating and monitoring patients. AED extension studies evaluate treatment retention, drug tolerability, and drug safety during individualized treatment with flexible dosing and thus provide information not available in rigid pivotal trials. Patient retention in the studies ranged from 75 to 80% at 1 year and from 36 to 68% at 2-year treatment intervals. Safety findings were generally similar to those of pivotal trials, with no major safety risks identified and with several specific adverse drug effects, such as hyponatremia, reported. The third-generation AEDs, some through new mechanisms and others with improved tolerability compared to related AEDs, provide new options in efficacy and tolerability.

Cognitive and Behavioral Comorbidities: An Unwanted Effect of Antiepileptic Drugs in Children

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders and, despite optimally chosen and dosed antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), approximately 20%-30% of patients will continue to have seizures. Behavior and cognition are negatively impacted by seizures, but AEDs are also a major contributor to behavioral and cognitive deficits. However, the cognitive and behavioral effect of AEDs in children is insufficiently emphasized in the literature. This review summarizes the cognitive and behavioral effects of AEDs in the pediatric population with the objective of helping pediatricians and pediatric neurologists to select the AEDs with the best profile for their individual patient's needs.

The efficacy of lacosamide as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy in focal epilepsy and its use in status epilepticus: clinical trial evidence and experience

Lacosamide (LCM) is approved for anticonvulsive treatment in focal epilepsy and exhibits its function through the slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels (VGSCs). LCM shows comparable efficacy with other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) licensed in the last decade: in three randomized placebo-controlled trials, significant median seizure reduction rates of 35.2% for 200 mg/day, 36.4-39% for 400 mg/day and 37.8-40% for 600 mg/day were reported. Likewise, 50% responder rates were 38.3-41.1% for 400 mg/day and 38.1-41.2% for 600 mg/day. Similar rates were reported in post-marketing studies. The main adverse events (AEs) are dizziness, abnormal vision, diplopia and ataxia. Overall, LCM is well tolerated and has no clinically-relevant drug-drug interactions. Due to the drug's intravenous availability, its use in status epilepticus (SE) is increasing, and the available data are promising.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Lacosamide in the Treatment of Children With Refractory Generalized Epilepsy

Lacosamide is FDA-approved in patients 17 years or older with partial-onset epilepsy. We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of lacosamide in children with refractory generalized epilepsy. We retrospectively reviewed records of 21 children with refractory generalized epilepsy treated with lacosamide in our institution from 2009-2013 divided into 2 subgroups- I, Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome, and II, other generalized epilepsies. Efficacy was defined as seizure freedom or ≥50% seizure reduction. Descriptive data analysis including seizure freedom was compared using c(2) analysis. There were eleven females and ten males with a mean age, of 11.9 years. Five patients became seizure free, nine had ≥50% seizure reduction, and seven had no response. Group I: seven had ≥50% improvement, one did not respond. Group II: five became seizure free, two had ≥50% improvement, five had no response. Lacosamide is effective and well tolerated in children with refractory generalized epilepsy particularly patients with Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome.

Efficacy and tolerability of add-on Lacosamide treatment in adults with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome: An observational study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lacosamide in adults with LGS in the clinical setting.

METHOD

The present report is a retrospective, open-label treatment study carried out from June 2013 to December 2014 at the National Institute of Colombia. Lacosamide was introduced as add-on therapy. All caregivers were instructed to initiate lacosamide at low doses (25-50 mg) and gradually increasing it every 2 weeks. The efficacy was evaluated based on the reduction in the rate of each countable type of seizure. We also evaluated the retention rate for lacosamide as the number of days with lacosamide during follow-up. The tolerability was evaluated base on account the adverse events.

RESULTS

We found that lacosamide only improves the seizure rate in three out of 19 patients with LGS, in two of them by more than 50%. The highest seizure reduction rate was observed in the focal and tonic-clonic seizures. The most commonly reported adverse events were worsening of seizures, aggressiveness and irritability. Nine patients (47.4%) showed worsening of their behavior during the treatment with lacosamide.

CONCLUSION

Lacosamide can exacerbate both, the tonic and astatic seizures, and the encephalopathy associated with this epileptic syndrome. However, it is interesting to consider the likelihood of suppression of generalized tonic-clonic and focal seizures. That is why; lacosamide could be an option after carefully balancing risks and benefits in each individual case.

Lacosamide-induced atrial tachycardia in a child with hypoplastic left-heart syndrome: the importance of assessing additional proarrhythmic risks

Antiepileptic medications have been reported to cause disturbances in cardiac conduction. Lacosamide decreases seizure burden by modulating sodium channels. Although it has been demonstrated to have few side effects, there have been reports of clinically significant cardiac conduction disturbances. We report the case of a child with hypoplastic left-heart syndrome and well-controlled multifocal atrial tachycardia who developed haemodynamically significant atrial tachycardia after receiving two doses of lacosamide.

Safety of lacosamide in children with refractory partial epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

The study was carried out to investigate the safety of lacosamide on children with refractory partial epilepsy.

MATERIALS & METHODS

The study was carried out at a tertiary care hospital after obtaining approval from the institutional ethics committee. Patients aged between 5 and 15 years taking oral lacosamide (LCM) tablets that were given orally as an adjunctive anti-epileptic drug were enrolled for assessing safety, tolerability and its effect on the behavioural life at every visit of titration, during the treatment period (3 months) and at 2 follow up visits that were done at monthly intervals. Adverse events reported by caregiver or by investigator were recorded. Patients/caregivers also completed a 25 items on Connor's behavioural rating clinical scale at every visit.

RESULTS

Out of 531 screened patients, 79 patients with refractory partial epilepsy were enrolled after they fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Mean age of the children was 8.84 ± 3.09 years (5-15 years), of which 53 were males and 26 females. The mean age at onset of seizures in males was 6.46 ± 3.57 and in females, 6.38 ± 3.39 years. Seventy-six children of 79, completed 3 months of treatment period showed significant (p < 0.001) decrease in the frequency of seizures, significant improvement in behaviour and showed good tolerability. Three (3.79%) patients dropped out of the study due to hyperactive behaviour, vomiting and lack of seizure control respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide is a well-tolerated newer antiepileptic drug that is effective in refractory partial epilepsy paediatric patients and concurrently improved patient's behaviour.

Lacosamide as adjunctive therapy in refractory epilepsy in adults: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To review the evidence for efficacy and safety of lacosamide in adult patients with refractory epilepsy and refractory status epilepticus (RSE).

METHODS

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, IPA, Google and Google Scholar (through October 2014) was performed.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies assessing lacosamide in 3509 refractory epilepsy patients were included. In 3 RCTs, more patients had at least 50% reduction in seizure frequency with lacosamide compared to placebo with 38.3-41.1%, 38.1-41.2%, and 18.3-25.8%, in the 400 mg/day, 600 mg/day, and placebo groups, respectively. In non-comparative trials, 18-69% of patients achieved at least 50% reduction in seizure frequency, and 1.7-26.2% achieved seizure freedom. Non-responders were documented in two trials, with 26.2-34% having no response. Thirteen studies assessing lacosamide in 390 RSE patients were included. When assessing lacosamide's ability to terminate RSE, one comparative cohort study found no improvement in SE duration or seizure control with addition of lacosamide. Another study documented no difference compared to use of phenytoin. Eleven descriptive studies using lacosamide as add-on RSE therapy revealed seizure termination rates of 0-100% (median 64.7%). In all patients receiving lacosamide, dizziness (21.8%), vision disturbances (10.4%), drowsiness (7.4%), headache (7.0%), nausea (6.5%), and coordination problems (5.8%) were the most common adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Based on evidence to date, adjunctive lacosamide is a treatment option to reduce seizure frequency in patients with refractory epilepsy and terminate seizures in patients with RSE. The safety information summary can be used to advise patients of potential adverse effects.

Efficacy and tolerability of lacosamide as an adjunctive therapy in children with refractory partial epilepsy

BACKGROUND

A unicentre, prospective study was performed to investigate the efficacy of lacosamide as adjunctive therapy in children with refractory partial epilepsy.

METHODS

The study was performed at a tertiary care hospital over a period of 30 months between November 2011 and May 2014. Seventy-nine children with refractory partial epilepsy (age 5-15 years) who had failed two or more antiepileptic drugs and in whom lacosamide was used as an add-on drug were enrolled. Lacosamide tablets were administered orally, at a dose of 25 mg for 1 week followed by 50 mg twice daily for the remaining period. Efficacy and tolerability evaluation was performed at every visit of titration, maintenance period (3 months), and two follow-up visits at monthly interval. Electrocardiogram and liver function tests were performed before enrollment and at the end of 3 months of lacosamide therapy. Patient's caregiver or investigator observed adverse events were recorded in a predesigned pro forma.

RESULTS

A total of 79 patients with uncontrolled partial epilepsy screened from 531 epileptic children were enrolled, after they satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean age of children enrolled was 8.8 ± 3.1 years (range 5-15 years); 53 children (67.0%) were boys. Mean weight of the patients was 24.2 ± 9.8 kg. The mean age at the onset of seizures was 6.4 ± 3.5 years. The mean dose of lacosamide administered was 4.1 mg/kg. Three patients (3.8%) dropped out of the study, because of vomiting, aggressive behavior, and poor response, respectively. Of 76 patients (96.2%) entering the maintenance period, 35 patients (44.3%) were seizure free, 32 patients (40.6%) indicated ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency, 3 patients (3.8%) indicated 25-49% seizure reduction, and 9 patients (11.4%) either had no change in seizure frequency or experience increase in seizure frequency.

CONCLUSION

Lacosamide is an effective add-on antiepileptic drug for children with refractory partial epilepsy and is well tolerated.

Specific binding of lacosamide to collapsin response mediator protein 2 (CRMP2) and direct impairment of its canonical function: implications for the therapeutic potential of lacosamide

The novel antiepileptic drug lacosamide (LCM; SPM927, Vimpat®) has been heralded as having a dual-mode of action through interactions with both the voltage-gated sodium channel and the neurite outgrowth-promoting collapsin response mediator protein 2 (CRMP2). Lacosamide's ability to dampen neuronal excitability through the voltage-gated sodium channel likely underlies its efficacy in attenuating the symptoms of epilepsy (i.e., seizures). While the role of CRMP2 in epilepsy has not been well studied, given the proposed involvement of circuit reorganization in epileptogenesis, the ability of lacosamide to alter CRMP2 function may prove disease modifying. Recently, however, the validity of lacosamide's interaction with CRMP2 has come under scrutiny. In this review, we address the contradictory reports concerning the binding of lacosamide to CRMP2 as well as the ability of lacosamide to directly impact CRMP2 function. Additionally, we address similarly the contradicting reports regarding the potential disease-modifying effect of lacosamide on the development and progression of epilepsy. As the vast majority of antiepileptic drugs influences only the symptoms of epilepsy, the ability to hinder disease progression would be a major breakthrough in efforts to cure or prevent this debilitating syndrome.

Efficacy and tolerability of add-on lacosamide in children with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Available data on the efficacy of lacosamide in children with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) are scarce and controversial. We present our experience with lacosamide therapy in children affected by LGS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Medical charts of all children affected by LGS receiving oral lacosamide adjunctive therapy in six paediatric neurology centres were retrospectively evaluated. Efficacy was determined according to the frequency of countable seizures during the 4 weeks prior to treatment and the frequency in the last 4 weeks of observation. Patients whose seizure frequency was reduced by at least 50% were defined as responders.

RESULTS

Eighteen children (mean age 12.3 years) were identified. After a mean follow-up period of 9 months, 33% of patients were responders. None of them was seizure-free during the study period. The overall seizure reduction rate was 29%. The percentage reductions from baseline in tonic seizures and drop-attacks rates were 31% and 20%, respectively. Adverse reactions occurred in 44% of patients. The drug was discontinued in four (22%) patients because of increased seizure frequency (three cases) and walking instability (another patient).

CONCLUSIONS

A third of children with LGS were responders after lacosamide adjunctive therapy. Although caution is still necessary when the drug is used in children with LGS, our preliminary observations suggest that lacosamide might be effective and represent a possible therapeutic option in children affected by LGS.

Lacosamide as an adjunctive therapy in pediatric patients with refractory focal epilepsy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lacosamide in pediatric patients with refractory focal epilepsy.

METHODS

We reviewed retrospectively the medical records of children younger than 18 years of age treated at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, in whom oral lacosamide was used as an adjunctive treatment for refractory focal epilepsy. Clinical information regarding the patients' epilepsy and the outcome of lacosamide treatment was gathered and analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients (16 boys, 5 girls) were included, with a median age of 13.9 (range, 1.2-17.9) years. The mean number of concomitant antiepileptic drugs was 3.0 (range, 1-6) and the mean duration of follow-up was 10.1 (range, 6.1-13.0) months. The mean maintenance dose of lacosamide was 5.4 (range, 1.4-9.8) mg/kg/day. Fourteen patients (67%) were responders; four of these were seizure free at the last follow-up. Seven patients (33%) were nonresponders: two of these presented with <50% seizure reduction and five showed no change in seizure frequency. Two patients (10%) discontinued oral lacosamide because of adverse events (aggressive behavior and depression). Mild transient treatment-related adverse events were observed in eight of the 21 patients (38%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lacosamide represents a useful drug that is effective for a wide range of pediatric refractory focal epilepsy and is well tolerated.

Update on the use of lacosamide in the treatment of partial-onset seizures

ABSTRAT: 

Lacosamide has a novel mechanism of action, namely selective enhancement of slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels. Trial data and clinical experience indicate that it is effective in the treatment of partial-onset seizures, and that it is well tolerated. Pivotal early clinical trials demonstrated median percent reductions in seizure frequency ranging from 26 to 35.3% in the 200 mg/day, from 36.4 to 39% in the 400 mg/day, and from 37.8 to 40% in the 600 mg/day treatment groups. Dose-related adverse events were similar in the early clinical trials, and were mainly CNS complaints including dizziness, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, ataxia, abnormal vision, diplopia and nystagmus. Because of the dose-dependent adverse events and lack of additional efficacy at the 600 mg/day daily dose, lacosamide has been approved as an adjunctive treatment at recommended daily doses of 200–400 mg/day.

Efficacy and safety of lacosamide in infants and young children with refractory focal epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Lacosamide is effective and well-tolerated antiepileptic drug (AED) in both children and adults.

AIM

This multicentric, prospective study investigates the efficacy and safety of lacosamide adjunctive therapy in children aged less than four years presenting with refractory focal seizures.

METHODS

Lacosamide was added to the baseline therapy at a starting dose of 1-2 mg/kg/day and titrated to the final dose, ranging from 7 to 15.5 mg/kg/day. Efficacy was evaluated after a three-month period of therapy. When possible, we compared the initial efficacy and the retention after a minimum of 12 months of lacosamide, with regard to loss of efficacy (defined as the return to the baseline seizure frequency).

RESULTS

Twenty-four children were enrolled in the study. Mean age was 2.7 years. After a minimum three-month period of lacosamide add-on therapy, ten (42%) patients were responders (more than a 50% decrease in seizure frequency), of whom 4 (17%) became seizure free. Retention rate, after a minimum of 12 months of lacosamide, was evaluated in a group of 18 patients. In the latter group, eight patients (44%) were initial responders (three of whom seizure free). After 12 months of follow-up, four of them (22%) maintained the improvement, 2 (11%) of whom remained seizure free. A loss of efficacy was observed in 4 of the initial responders (50%). Adverse events were seen in 8 (33%) patients.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that lacosamide is an effective and a well-tolerated antiepileptic drug in an etiologically wide range of focal seizures. Therefore, lacosamide might represent a possible therapeutic option in infants and young children affected by uncontrolled focal epilepsy.

Vertigo/dizziness as a Drugs' adverse reaction

INTRODUCTION

Vertigo, dizziness, and nausea encompass a spectrum of balance-related symptoms caused by a variety of etiologies. Balance is affected by many systems: Proprioceptive pathways and visual, cerebellar, vestibulocochlear, and vascular / vasovagal systems. Vertigo is a subtype of dizziness, in which a subject, as a result to a dysfunction of the vestibular system, improperly experiments the perception of motion. The most useful clinical subdivision is to categorize vertigo into true vertigo and pseudovertigo, whereas from a pathophysiological point of view, vertigo can be classified into central, peripheral, and psychogenic. It is not easy to identify the cause of vertigo since the patients often are not able to precisely describe their symptoms. An impressive list of drugs may cause vertigo or dizziness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The aim of the present study was to analyze the data extracted from the reporting cards of the ADRs (adverse drug reactions), received at our Pharmacovigilance Regional Center (Calabria, Italy) in 2012. In particular, the data concerning the occurrence of vertigo and dizziness, after taking certain classes of drugs, have been considered.

RESULTS

Our results show that, among the side-effects of different classes of drugs such as anti-convulsants, anti-hypertensives, antibiotics, anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, and anti-inflammatory, also vertigo or dizziness are included.

CONCLUSIONS

Spontaneous reports of vertigo or dizziness, as side-effect of certain drugs, received at our Pharmacovigilance Center, represented the 5% of all reports in 2012. Considering the high incidence of such an ADR for several drugs' classes, it can be speculated that under-reporting also affect vertigo and dizziness. Despite the fact that these ADRs might not represent a direct threaten for life, indirectly they can cause secondary damage to patients such as falls, fractures etc. Balance should be accurately monitored during drug use and particularly in fragile patients.